Opinion
2018–05046 S.C.I. No. 16–00633
12-30-2020
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Aramis CABRERA, appellant.
Gary E. Eisenberg, New City, NY, for appellant. David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (William C. Ghee and Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.
Gary E. Eisenberg, New City, NY, for appellant.
David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (William C. Ghee and Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., COLLEEN D. DUFFY, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Nicholas DeRosa, J.), rendered February 27, 2017, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the plea of guilty is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Orange County, for further proceedings on the indictment.
" ‘[A] trial court has the constitutional duty to ensure that a defendant, before pleading guilty, has a full understanding of what the plea connotes and its consequences’ " ( People v. Turner, 24 N.Y.3d 254, 258, 997 N.Y.S.2d 671, 22 N.E.3d 179, quoting People v. Catu, 4 N.Y.3d 242, 244–245, 792 N.Y.S.2d 887, 825 N.E.2d 1081 ; see People v. Walton, 177 A.D.3d 786, 787, 110 N.Y.S.3d 311 ). "To meet due process requirements, a defendant ‘must be aware of the postrelease supervision component of that sentence in order to knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently choose among alternative courses of action’ " ( People v. Turner, 24 N.Y.3d at 258, 997 N.Y.S.2d 671, 22 N.E.3d 179, quoting People v. Catu, 4 N.Y.3d at 245, 792 N.Y.S.2d 887, 825 N.E.2d 1081 ), and "[w]ithout such procedures, vacatur of the plea is required" ( People v. Turner, 24 N.Y.3d at 258, 997 N.Y.S.2d 671, 22 N.E.3d 179 ). It is not enough for a court to generally inform a defendant that a term of postrelease supervision will be imposed as a part of the sentence (see People v. Boyd, 12 N.Y.3d 390, 393, 880 N.Y.S.2d 908, 908 N.E.2d 898 ; People v. Robinson, 160 A.D.3d 774, 777, 75 N.Y.S.3d 199 ). Rather, for a plea of guilty to be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, the court must inform the defendant of either the specific period of postrelease supervision that will be imposed or, at the least, the maximum potential duration of postrelease supervision that may be imposed (see People v. Boyd, 12 N.Y.3d at 393, 880 N.Y.S.2d 908, 908 N.E.2d 898 ; People v. Robinson, 160 A.D.3d at 777, 75 N.Y.S.3d 199 ).
Here, at the plea proceeding, the County Court did not specify the period of postrelease supervision to be imposed or, alternatively, the maximum potential duration of postrelease supervision that could be imposed. The court's failure to so advise the defendant prevented his plea from being knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. Accordingly, the judgment must be reversed, the plea of guilty vacated, and the matter remitted to the County Court, Orange County, for further proceedings on the indictment.
In light of our determination, we do not reach the defendant's remaining contentions.
RIVERA, J.P., DUFFY, IANNACCI and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.